Ghostbusters

It seems strange to me that a movie remake has caused such outrage and yet here it is, because the main characters are women. So what if the film was made to satisfy feminism? Worst case scenario, the franchise gains a new audience, the presence of women in Hollywood increases ever so slightly, and the remake sucks a la Psycho‘s 1998 shot-for-shot remake. Best case scenario, the franchise takes on a whole new angle expanding its possibilities for future films and gives movie producers a whole slew of new ideas when planning for the future. This is untapped territory, people. No one is forced to watch it. Movie franchises are remade every year. Sometimes they suck (the most recent Spiderman?). Sometimes they really really don’t (The Dark Knight). But the existence of a poor Spiderman movie, or a surprisingly unimpressive shot-for-shot remake of a classic film doesn’t tarnish the legacy of what came before – in any way. It just doesn’t. So now I ask: what’s wrong with remaking a movie that originally starred men with actors that aren’t men? Absolutely nothing. You’re not cool for being part of the backlash.

With that out of the way, the Ghostbusters remake was just okay. The sheer lack of satisfying humour was disappointing, given the four actors who made up the team. On their own, Kristin Wiig and Melissa McCarthy are powerhouses of comedy. Leslie Jones needs her own movie yesterday, and Kate McKinnon looks likely to join the ranks of Molly, Tina, Amy and Kristin before her. Individually they all held their own with four strong personalities, plus supporting roles by Chris Hemsworth and Cecily Strong, among others, but the result might have been too much of a good thing while lacking the support of a strong enough story.